Introduction

Globalization has without a doubt changed the course of everyday lives. From the clothes
that we wear, the food that we eat, and even the word that we speak. Contrary to popular
perception, globalization is more than economics, consumerism or trade. This research explores
three different dimensions of globalization: economic, social/cultural, and political so as to see
its effects and implications in socio-economics, political discourses, conceptions of culture,
society, and security.

Parsing Globalization
Globalization is defined as “the widening, deepening and speeding up of worldwide
interconnectedness in all aspects of contemporary social life, from cultural to the criminal, the
financial to the spiritual” (Tomlinson, 1999; Pieterse, 2009; Held et al. 2002). As defined by
Modelski (quoted in Held et al. 2002) There are three main schools of thought associated with
globalization wherein one is dubbed the transformalist. The transformalist school is persuasive,
they believe that globalization, although deep in meaning and wide in application for its multiple
definitions is nevertheless “creating transnational, multiple and simultaneous group identities and
memberships that exhibit characteristics of glocalization” meaning products, practices, services,
among others is developed and distributed globally and is also reconstructed to adapt and
accommodate people’s need in a local market. While at the same time, these identities are spread
globally.
In Jonathan Miche’s, Forms of globalisation: From ‘capitalism unleashed’ to a global
green new deal: European journal of economics and economic policies (2018) He presente a
timeline wherein the term has evolved, “The term ‘globalisation’ has had multiple forms and
definitions over centuries. In the early 20th century the world was dominated with a ‘free
market’ form of globalisation, which had ultimately resulted into armed conflicts as the leading
industrial economies and countries sought economic advantage through domination and force.
Through the end of the second world war an era of ‘managed globalisation’ emerged, labelled as
the ‘Golden Age of Capitalism’. And then, the Thatcher and Reagan administrations, who
launched deregulation, privatisation, financialisation and demutualisation or as the term coined
by Andrew Glyn, ‘Capitalism unleashed’, which ultimately led to the 2007–2008 global financial
crisis and the 2009 Great Recession.

Dimensions of globalization
Globalization, being complex and multidimensional in nature. Its coordinates are not
easily established. Globalization presents loads of implications, it can affect various dimensions
of activity. Hence, it is essential to know its different dimensions so that we could understand as
to where globalization implies and exerts its influence and effects.

The Cultural Dimension

Culture as defined by american philosopher and sociologist, George Herbert Mead refers
to “the whole complex of traditional behavior developed by the human race and successively
learned by generations” (Mead, 1937). First used by british sociologist Edward Taylor (1870), he
described it as “that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, law, morals, customs,
and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society.” Culture may be
defined as the totality of the mental and physical reactions and activities that characterize the
behavior of individuals composing a social group collectively and individually in relations to
their natural environment, to other groups, to members of the group itself and each of the
individuals to himself/herself (Castillo, 2019). Sperber and Claidiere’s (2008) definition of
culture leverages that of Richerson and Boyd, as “information capable of affecting individuals’
behavior that they acquire from other members of their species through teaching, imitation, and
other forms of social transmission”

“The cultural dimension of globalization is under construction being shaped by cultural

development having in view the multinational integration laying emphasis upon the issue of
identity as well as tolerance for a global and pluralistic culture. Within the framework of this
particular culture, the national values develop together with universal values in the benefit of the
whole international community.” (Pîrnuta, 2013) The cultural dimension deals with unity of
cultural diversity globally. Wherein, it connects mutuality and influences amongst cultures,
leading to cultural uniformization globally.

Debates on the exact nature and effects of cultural globalization show wide variance.
Tomlinson (1999) suggests that “globalization lies at the heart of modern culture; cultural
practices lie at the heart of globalization” This notion leans on defining culture and globalization
in associational, parallel terms. Culture exists within specific groups before the densening of
social, political and economic interconnections, but the two-way effects are clearly identifiable
(Magu, 2015). Some view cultural globalization in terms of “the homogenization of the world
under the auspices of American popular culture or Western consumerism in general”
(Tomlinson, 1999) Which essentially implies that cultures will cease to exist on the onslaught
ofvWestern/American consumerism. Although Global influence of Americanism/Western
consumerism is significant, it is not always adopted in toto by the target cultures.

Pieterse (1999) conceptualized globalization as a multi-dimensional occurrence with

different definitions. For instance, Pieterse suggests that “in economics, economic
internalization, globalizing production and global finance characterize globalization. For
international relations, increasing interstate relations and progression of global politics are
evident. For cultural studies, global communications and worldwide cultural standardization—
Coca-Colonization and McDonaldization” are primary indicators of globalization. Moreover,
Featherstone (1990) argues that “there may be emerging sets of ‘third cultures’, which
themselves are conduits for all sorts of diverse cultural flows”

The Political Dimension

 Political globalization is manifested by international political initiatives, international
relations, and the development of global political institutions. (Heywood, 1997) defines politics
as the activity through which people make, preserve, and amend the general rules under which
they live.

Intertwined with the economic dimension, “The government decides the process of
production, distribution, trade and commerce; it takes measures for the increase of production of
essential commodities either by increasing the producers of such commodities or by producing
them by itself; restricts the production of unnecessary and harmful commodities and secures
improvement of the means of transportation with a view to managing a good distribution system”
(Sarmah, 2004). The government is the institution wherein the authority to regulate and control
foriegn trade, currency, taxation, and the economy itself.

Moreover, (Modelski, et al. 2007) defined political globalization as the extension of

global political systems and institutions, in which international discourse and affairs are
managed, the implications and concrete examples of this notion is the United Nations and the
Association of Southeast Asian Nations. At the end of world war two, at the height of revolutions
and freedom from colonization, a trend toward multilateralism (pioneered by the United
Nations), to an emerging 'transnational state apparatus,' and towards the development of national
and international nongovernmental organizations that serves as surveillance to governments that
have have increased their activities and influence (Moghadam, 2005) so as to protect peace and
ensure prosperity and avoid further armed conflicts and wars.

The economic globalization

The economic dimension integrates the production processes and markets. It deals with
the interdependence of the national economies, the transnational corporations as well as
sustainable development (Pîrnuta, 2013). Economic globalization is regularly seen as a dark
cycle that clearly returns more benefit for the organizations, while expanding joblessness for the
common laborers. Then again, globalization is not really controllable, since it isn't just a cycle
but instead a phenotypic sign inside the causal fundamental universe of economy and politico-
social conduct (Ruettimann, n.d). It refers to the generalized worldwide movement of goods,
capital, services, Information and Technology. Here, you are going to see growing economic
integration, Global , regional, and local economies across the world. This is mainly carried out
by intensifying the cross-border movement of goods, equipment, innovations and resources. That
is the production, finance, markets, technology, regimes of organizations , agencies,
corporations, and labor.

In the book The German Ideology, published in 1845–1846, Marx and Engels pointed out
that big industry developed the means of communication and the modern world economy,
subordinated trade to itself, converted all capital into industrial capital and thus created rapid
circulation (financial system development) and capital centralization. For the first time, it created
world history, insofar as it made all civilized nations and every individual member of them
dependent on the whole world to fulfill their needs, thus eliminating the former natural
exclusiveness of separate nations (Sun, 2003). Meaning, through transportation, communication,
transnational trade, and legal agreements, industries have defy geographical differences.
Wherein, foriegn industries have managed to infiltrate other states.
Through economic globalization, as to the exchange of goods, people have had the luxury
of diversifying their needs and wants. For instance, most if not all smart phones available to the
Philippines are imported. All apples in the Philippine market are imported. In fact, the
Philippines has been an active participant of economic globalization as early as the 18th century
through the galleon trade, Trade via Manila with Ming China acted as a significant source of
revenue for the Spanish Empire and a fundamental source of revenue for the Philippine Islands'
Spanish colonists. Filipino craftsmen crafted galleons used for trade between East and West
(Medillo, 2015). Economic globalization could bring a country's growth and prosperity, but it
could also bring disastrous rivalry and dilemma. The policy chosen and the response adopted is
the deciding point. It is therefore the current situation which determines whether national
functions are reinforced or weakened.

References:
● Castillo, L. M. T. (2019). Understanding culture, society and politics . FNB educational,
INC.
● Featherstone, M. (1990). “Global Culture: An Introduction.” Theory Culture Society 7.
● Held, D. (2002). Global transformations: politics, economics and culture. Stanford
University Press.
● Heywood, A. (2019). Politics (5th ed.). Red Globe Press.
● Magu, S. (2015). Reconceptualizing Cultural Globalization: Connecting the "Cultural
Global" and the "Cultural Local". Social Sciences, 4(3), 630-645.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/socsci4030630
● Mead, G. (1934). Mind, Self and Society. Vol. 11. University of University of Chicago
Press.
● Medillo, R. J. P. (2015, June 18). Forgotten history? The polistas of the Galleon Trade.
Rappler.https://www.rappler.com/move-ph/ispeak/96830-forgotten-history-polistas-
galleon-trade.
● Michie, J. (2018). Forms of globalisation: From ‘capitalism unleashed’ to a global green
new deal: European journal of economics and economic policies = Europäische
zeitschrift für Ökonomie und wirtschaftspolitik. European Journal of Economics and
Economic Policies, 15(2), 163-163–173. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.4337/ejeep.2018.02.08.
● Modelski, G., Devezas, T., Thompson W. R., (2007, December 20). Globalization as
Evolutionary Process: Modeling Global Change. Routledge. p. 59. ISBN 978-1-135-
97764-1.
● Moghadam, V. M. (2005, 20 January). Globalizing Women: Transnational Feminist
Networks. JHU Press. p. 35. ISBN 978-0-8018-8024-7.
● Pieterse, J. (2009). Globalization and Culture: Global Mélange. Lanham: Rowman &
Littlefield, 2009.
● Pieterse, J. N. (2009). Globalization and Culture: Global Mélange. Lanham: Rowman &
Littlefield.
● Pîrnuta, O. (2013). THE SECURITY ENVIRONMENT AND THE PHENOMENON OF
GLOBALIZATION: DIMENSIONS AND PROCESSES. Review of the Air Force
Academy, (2), 67-74. https://search.proquest.com/docview/1462044476?
accountid=34302
● Ruettimann, B. (n.d). Economic Globalization: The Five Basic Globalization Types.
Social Studies.https://www.sociostudies.org/almanac/articles/economic_globalization-
_the_five_basic_globalization_types/.
● Sarmah, D. (2004), “Political Science”, New Age International publishers, New Delhi.
● Sperber, D. & Nicolas, C. (2008). Defining and explaining culture (comments on
Richerson and Boyd, Not by genes alone).
● Sun, Q. (2003). Economic globalization affecting economic development of East Asian
countries. International Journal of Asian Management, 2(1), 1-13.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10276-003-0008-3
● Tomlinson, J. (1999). Globalization and Culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.